OILERS ACQUIRE SCRIVENS

This could be a very good trade, but they have to get the man signed. Oilers gave up a 3rd round pick for the right to do that, which could represent good value. Acquiring Scrivens now gives the team an opportunity to stabilize a situation now instead of trying to do too many things during the summer. There are no guarantees he comes here as a free agent, and the Oilers didn’t (or haven’t) spent insane dollars for the position.

scrivens even

 

Scrivens ranks top 10 in even-strength save percentage in the entire NHL, but Martin Jones ranks 2nd (Quick is 32nd). If we believe even strength save percentage is the best way to value goaltenders, this is a good one.

They have to get him signed.

mirtle scrivens

 

graham tweet

 

written by

The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.
Related Posts

184 Responses to "OILERS ACQUIRE SCRIVENS"

  1. engineer says:

    MacT will wear out the deck chairs real quick at this rate.

  2. OilClog says:

    This is awesome! We may suck! But now MacT is 6parts of 14 NHL deals this season.

    If Scrivens comes in and plays lights out… How much will it cost us to get Ranford on the staff.

    Hendricks is better then anything we can currently ice on that 4th line role. Lander isn’t physical, isn’t that great on the dot, isn’t an offensive player.. Kinda useless.

    I’d be more concern for poor Arco, he shouldn’t lose out to Hendricks, hopefully Sam is gone soon.

  3. oilersfan says:

    well I suspect he will get a third or fourth rounder for nick Schultz and that means we got scrivens for Schultz. I won’t mention giving away tom gilbert

  4. OilClog says:

    I think Schultz will still land a 2nd those top teams near the deadline will drive the price up even if it is Nultz.

  5. Mattaklap says:

    He most certainly does sign on. I operate on the assumption that he prefers a starting job to pine-pilotry on a better team. This is a perfect audition for the good gentleman. Very good trade for he and the team.

  6. fifthcartel says:

    Eakins will death stare him till he signs.

  7. oilersfan says:

    I see on extraskater that Hendricks has a 42.3% corsi this year, but has a relative corsi of -6%. does that mean he is given 6% extra for zone starts and quality of competition?

    according to the Nashville tenneseean Hendricks played third line wing with gaustad instead of fourth line center, and plays 11 minutes a night in both Nashville and Washington. those aren’t fourth line minutes…

  8. Lowetide says:

    oilersfan:
    I see on extraskater that Hendricks has a 42.3% corsi this year, but has a relative corsi of -6%. does that mean he is given 6% extra for zone starts and quality of competition?

    according to the Nashville tenneseean Hendricks played third line wing with gaustad insteadof fourth line center, and plays 11 minutes a night in both Nashville and Washington. those aren’t fourth line minutes…

    If he is playing third line minutes in Nashville and has two goals, that’s Nashville’s fault.

  9. daryl says:

    DD and a 3rd for Scrivens and Hendricks? I guess we’ll see how much the LA system made Scrivens (and Jones) but on the face of it, awesome.

  10. striatic says:

    So Eakins is the GM now?

  11. Woodguy says:

    MacT doesn’t have a 2nd or 3rd now.

    Need to get some back when the UFA go out the door at the deadline.

    I like Scrivens a lot. I hope they can sign him.

    Poile owned MacT’s soul on the DD trade.

    Must have knew that MacT wanted to pull the trigger on the Scrivens deal and made him pay dearly for the pleasure.

    Hendricks looks like a decent PKer, but he gets too much $$$ for too long for a 32 year old.

  12. Bag of Pucks says:

    Awesome, a local boy with training from Ranford. Re-sign Byz for the vet presence and this gives you a solid tandem while Brossoit develops on the farm. Plus a C with size and FO ability.

    Addressing actual needs. Attaboy MacT.

  13. stevezie says:

    I am moving my last post from a now outdated thread…

    Romulus Apotheosis: great move. Love that one. Not sure you needed to give up Dubs for so little.

    I was about to wonder if NYI wouldn’t have been desperate enough to try Dubnyk, but the value of Scrivens is a third. You might be able to argue that in light of his draft pedigree, international play and strong last season Dubnyk has equal value to Scrivens, but you would have a hard time telling me he has more. (EDIT CO just made the same point much more succinctly- just look at the numbers: Scrivens’ are better)

    At this point I think the Oilers need a good NHL player, even a 4th liner, more than they need a 3rd.

    The question as to whether Hendricks is such a player is open to debate, but I comfort myself with the reminder that if we need to Eager Hendricks, it Katz’ money and I don’t care.

    VanOil:
    Scrivens is a viable 1B and this Gordless team needs more Atheists. That 6th round pick we got for Omark might be our top pick in the this years Draft if we are taking on Salary dumps such as Hendricks rather than picks.

    Do not forget we are about to trade a few guys for picks/prospects. Just pretend we moved Nick Schultz for Ben Scrivens- that’s about what this equals.

    Scrivens is no saviour, but he should make a fine backup (not even 1b) next year and right now we lacked that. The goalie search remains where it was.

    Bookyee? How are you feeling? I hated this at first but have explained it to myself in a way that makes sense. I still don’t like the Hendrix pickup, but I can at least see the thinking behind it.

  14. LoDog says:

    So the far superior impending UFA goes for a third and some people around here think MacT should have got better for Dubnyk? Lucky we got any kind of useful player at all.

  15. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Kharia teammate getting noticed by Oilers’ PR team:

    http://oilers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=700610&navid=DL|EDM|home

    could be a nice sleeper pick.

    Oh… and Evan Campbell scored a goal!!!!

    http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=59951

    alert your local alderman. the parade route needs to be marked off.

  16. Bar_Qu says:

    I don’t know that this deal rescues this day. Retaining half Dubnyk’s salary absolutely killed me.

    The only hope(!) I have left is that if Hendricks is as bad as advertised they can buy out the contract in the summer under the compliance option.

    uhhhh

  17. Woodguy says:

    So the Oilers bringing in Hendricks tells me that:

    1) MacT doesn’t like Lander much

    2) Gagner may have played his last game as a C on the OIlers

  18. Yeti says:

    LoDog:
    So the far superior impending UFA goes for a third and some people around here think MacT should have got better for Dubnyk? Lucky we got any kind of useful player at all.

    The question is whether Hendricks is in fact a useful player at all, in the context of his cap-hit and length of contract. Some seem convinced he has negative value…

  19. Lucinius says:

    I don’t mind the moves today, honestly.

    Dubnyk had to go — for both the team and his career. Between his having a poor year and, well, playing for the Edmonton Oilers (an NHL team) his career dissipation light was blinking fast enough to nearly become constant. A reboot for him in Nashville, a team with far superior defensive systems (and team) in place should cushion any poor play to some degree and he’ll be able to concentrate more on being able to fix his game.

    Hendricks is a player I’ve liked (albeit barely more than having a neutral stance on him) since watching him play for the Caps. He’s got a number of flaws but is a fairly flexible player in being able to play center or wing and slide up and down the roster a bit (albeit primarily between the third and fourth lines) and pk (third most used in Nashville, I think? Saw a fair bit of pk time in Washington as well, if I’m not mistaken). He also brings some more size/grit/sandpaper/turkey sandwiches/whatever to the team.

    Scrivens.. I’ve never been a huge fan of his. However, it would hard for him to suck more than Dubnyk has this year — although I’m sure the team in front of him will give him ample opportunity to try. Still, likely a wash in terms of overall talent and that means its an overall benefit to the Oilers, as he’s new and not used to the WTF aspect of the Oilers.

    Not thrilled that this likely means the end of Lander in the organization, as I’ve been a fan of his, and I doubt the team will keep him around now, unless he moves to wing and acts as a second center for the fourth line, or third line in the years ahead.

  20. G Money says:

    oilersfan: but has a relative corsi of -6%. does that mean

    It means the team does 6% better in shots differential with him off the ice then when he’s on it.

    The worrying part is not just the 6%. It is that Hendricks’ Corsi (On and Rel) are both much worse this season than last year in Washington. We better hope it’s just a temporary and/or situational thing that will improve with change or revert with time – rather than the start of a Belangerian slide into hell.

  21. Ducey says:

    fifthcartel:
    Eakins will death stare him till he signs.

    A few months of backstopping the Oilers should drive his save %, and contract price, down. The timing is good from that perspective.

    I like the Scrivens trade. Not sure on the DD trade. I imagine the chance came up to get Scrivens and MacT unloaded DD in order to avoid the 3 goalie problem.

  22. steveb12344 says:

    Bar_Qu:
    I don’t know that this deal rescues this day. Retaining half Dubnyk’s salary absolutely killed me.

    The only hope(!) I have left is that if Hendricks is as bad as advertised they can buy out the contract in the summer under the compliance option.

    uhhhh

    Dubnyk’s salary is only for the rest of this season. I highly doubt it creates any problems for MacT.

    Unless maybe it just breaks your heart to see Katz have to put out an extra million or so out of his pocket.

  23. Lois Lowe says:

    From a different thread…

    I am not sure that Hendricks is pencilled in as a 4C. I think he replaces Joensuu as the big body winger in the top 9.

  24. Caramel Obvious says:

    The Scrivens deal is a great, great, bet when you consider the alternative is whale hunting for a UFA goalie in the offseason. A third round pick is a small price to pay for information.

    Some numbers on Scrivens, AHL only to avoid the LA KIngs effect, in comparison to other young goalies the Oilers might acquire.

    Scrivens: .923
    John Gibson: .915
    Frederick Anderson: .923
    Khudobin: 912 (though really good NHL numbers in small sample size)

    If you package the deals up Hendricks + Scrivens for Dubnyk and third round pick you get in the short term a clearly better team. In the long term there are two possibilities. 1) Sign Scrivens to a decent contract which would make this a win in the long and short term or 2) Don’t sign Scrivens in which case it is Hendricks for a third round pick, which is only bad if he’s Eric Belanger. He might be, but if he can play at all that keeps kids on the farm and that makes me happy too.

    I’ll take the bet and be happy.

  25. OilClog says:

    No one in the league is giving Edmonton anything more then what they got for Dubnyk. I’m surprised they got a serviceable player back!! Here people are crying about moving a goalie letting in goals for a defensive depth forward we only have 1 of in Gordon. What the hell guys?

    He makes under 2mil a season for 3 more years. That is nothing, how much is Jones making? Grebs?
    What if he slides in along side Gordon perfectly, can take draws, take the body, shut guys down. Then his contract is beautiful!!

    He is exactly what MacT said he was looking for, a depth player that can take draw, bang bodies, make a difference. What’s not to like? We need a couple players like him, he’s only 32. It’s a good move. IMO.

  26. oilersfan says:

    Bar QU, what difference does retaining dubnyk’s salary make? the oilers season is over, he is a ufa, they wil be dumping salary as the season goes when they trade hemsky and Schultz. don’t see why it matters.

    as for henricks making 1.8, I suspect he is a fourth liner 5×5 and a pk specialist, thus the 11 minutes per night, and if you look at what prust and Nystrom make, I don’t see how it is too much. not to mention the cap will be $80 million by the time this contract is in the fourth year it is about like paying a guy 1.4 now. really you guys are suicidal about a fourth liner making half a million too much on a 80 million cap (when it matters). that is about about .6 of one percent of the total cap.

  27. Melman says:

    Woodguy,

    Why can’t they give Lander another year after this one to improve his game. He got messed up by being in the bigs his first year and is become a strong AHL player. He is only 22 and an RFA. Flushing him now is what bad teams do.

  28. icecastles says:

    Every once in a while, I question MacT’s wisdom. I have to stop doing that. The more I think about it, the more impressive this pair of deals becomes. I love this man.

  29. G Money says:

    Scrivens is from Spruce Grove.

    Seems to me the Oilers may have had some success in the distant past with a goalie from Spruce Grove.

    Hmmmm….

  30. Caramel Obvious says:

    steveb12344: Dubnyk’s salary is only for the rest of this season.I highly doubt it creates any problems for MacT.

    Unless maybe it just breaks your heart to see Katz have to put out an extra million or so out of his pocket.

    Yeah, the retained salary part is irrelevant. The only negative is the length of Hendricks contract but that depends on how he plays.

  31. OilClog says:

    Woodguy:
    So the Oilers bringing in Hendricks tells me that:

    1) MacT doesn’t like Lander much

    2) Gagner may have played his last game as a C on the OIlers

    What does Lander ever bring to the table? No energy, no excitement in his step, no real anything. I’m glad MacT is looking for options outside rather then throwing Lander to the wolves. Let him stew in the AHL pump his numbers and flip him for value.

  32. Ryan says:

    Woodguy:
    MacT doesn’t have a 2nd or 3rd now.

    Need to get some back when the UFA go out the door at the deadline.

    I like Scrivens a lot.I hope they can sign him.

    Poile owned MacT’s soul on the DD trade.

    Must have knew that MacT wanted to pull the trigger on the Scrivens deal and made him pay dearly for the pleasure.

    Hendricks looks like a decent PKer, but he gets too much $$$ for too long for a 32 year old.

    Good Gord… that’s all we got for DD… a guy with negative trade value.

  33. fifthcartel says:

    So is Scrivens basically the number one guy then…

  34. Mattaklap says:

    Caramel Obvious: Yeah, the retained salary part is irrelevant.The only negative is the length of Hendricks contract but that depends on how he plays.

    I think his contract is moveable if need be. General managers are weird like that. I’m thinking trade deadline to help replace picks, mayhaps?

  35. LoDog says:

    steveb12344: Dubnyk’s salary is only for the rest of this season. I highly doubt it creates any problems for MacT.Unless maybe it just breaks your heart to see Katz have to put out an extra million or so out of his pocket.

    Ya I don’t get anyone ccmplaining about the Oilers retaining half the salary for the rest of the year. You may not like Hendricks or his contract but the money means nothing.

  36. Melman says:

    Bernier brought back Frattin a 2nd and a 3rd – good value?

  37. Ducey says:

    Woodguy:
    So the Oilers bringing in Hendricks tells me that:

    1) MacT doesn’t like Lander much

    2) Gagner may have played his last game as a C on the OIlers

    I think the problem with Lander is that he brings little grit or aggression. He is like the baseball player that plays ok defense and hits .255/.310/.360. Useful, but someone you are always trying to upgrade on.

    With all the small/ wimpy players the Oilers have, they think they need to add some size/ grit/ aggressiveness in their lineup. I kind of agree.

    I see no reason they can’t have him on the farm next year. Someone might grab him on waivers, but if not, he might develop some more aggression (and faceoff expertise) as he matures.

  38. stevezie says:

    Woodguy: Poile owned MacT’s soul on the DD trade.

    I’m not sure how you can say that now. The best defence of the Dubby trade is the Scrivens trade. Not because we have “replaced” him, but because it shows that the value for Scrivens is a third round pick. If Scrivens is only worth a 3rd, what is Dubby worth?

    You yourself said:
    Hendricks is a good PKer by the SA/60 numbers.

    He’s not totally useless.

    The term and $ for a 32 year old are too much though.

    Might be ok in the short term.

    I agree that considering his contract and their financial situation Nashville should have considered themselves lucky to give him to us- I think MacT could have done better. But if we have to buy him out in a year or two that only costs Katz’ money. MacT is absolutely correct to use Katz’ money as an advantage, right? Get vets on long term deals other teams can’t afford because buying them out only costs Katz, not the team!

    This is good thinking, as long as this is the thinking. If we are actually planning on playing a 35 year-old Matt Hendricks… yeesh.

  39. russ99 says:

    Bar_Qu,

    I was thinking the same thing.

    This year is a wash anyway, so next year’s cap is a bigger concern than this year’s.

    If Hendricks and Scrivens work out, great. If not, we could be off the hook on both of them this summer. We’ll get a long look at both and can assess further.

    Besides, it’s Katz’s money, if he wants let MacT play dumb with it, that’s his prerogative.

  40. stevezie says:

    Wouldn’t it be a hoot if we still end up with James Riemer?

  41. Thinker says:

    I love the scrivens deal, but am hesitant to call him a good goalie before he plays for the oil drop.
    I don’t like Hendricks, and his cap hit. I would have preferred a 5th rounder back, or even letting dubnyk walk. A player who the best we can hope for is that he is a non-factor, sounds familiar.

  42. Wolfpack says:

    OilClog:
    No one in the league is giving Edmonton anything more then what they got for Dubnyk. I’m surprised they got a serviceable player back!! Here people are crying about moving a goalie letting in goals for a defensive depth forward we only have 1 of in Gordon. What the hell guys?

    He makes under 2mil a season for 3 more years. That is nothing, how much is Jones making? Grebs?
    What if he slides in along side Gordon perfectly, can take draws, take the body, shut guys down. Then his contract is beautiful!!

    He is exactly what MacT said he was looking for, a depth player that can take draw, bang bodies, make a difference. What’s not to like? We need a couple players like him, he’s only 32. It’s a good move. IMO.

    This is the way I am choosing to look at these trades as well. DD’s value was questionable, though I feel like a lot of the problem was the poor defense in front of him. Poor guy was shelled every night. And it was clear MacT did not have confidence in him when he tried to trade him at the draft.

    The Oilers have a lot of needs but two I have seen mentioned here a lot are a better goalie and actual NHL players for the bottom six. MacT tried to get those today so the question becomes, do we think Scrivens and Hendricks fit the bill?

  43. OilClog says:

    A player like Hendricks would excel under a MacT coach team, Hendricks isn’t here to score. I’m sure the coach is a very happy man right now knowing he got a veteran that knows positioning and has tons of experience. All of a sudden there’s another veteran voice helping guide the youth, the team desperate needs this.

  44. Marcus Oilerius says:

    stevezie,

    Hendricks has negative value.

    There’s no way Hendricks would fetch a 3rd round, 4th round, or even 6th round pick. He’s old, he wasn’t good to begin with, he’s fading, and he’s got a significant cap hit for a 4th-liner ($1.85m) for another 3 years.

  45. book¡je says:

    MacT has done better than I initially assessed in most of the trades he has made (i.e. Perron doing better than anticipated, the Smid trade looking much better today, etc). I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on the DD trade until I see the results in Edmonton.

    Also, I think its fair to consider this. Today, both Nashville and Edmonton got a goalie. Maybe Edmonton had to give Nashville a sweet deal to prevent them from beating Edmonton’s trade to LA. In other words, the two deals need to be looked at together.

    So, I am holding my critisism until I see what the results are on the ice.

  46. Caramel Obvious says:

    Interesting note on Hendricks. His corsi percentage this year is poor. However his shot percentage is 47.4% which in the context of 42% zone starts is pretty close to 50%. I’ll take that.

    So the question is which number do you choose to believe?

    He also has a history of fighting. Which I don’t care for but if he does it then there is less of a call to find someone who does.

  47. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Melman:
    Bernier brought back Frattin a 2nd and a 3rd – good value?

    and 500K in cap.

  48. book¡je says:

    stevezie: I’m not sure how you can say that now. The best defence of the Dubby trade is the Scrivens trade. Not because we have “replaced” him, but because it shows that the value for Scrivens is a third round pick. If Scrivens is only worth a 3rd, what is Dubby worth?

    I agree with this. LA could have traded Scrivens to any other team, so it shows what the market for UFA goalies is right now.

  49. Derek says:

    For comedy purposes: https://twitter.com/JenScrivs/status/412393999152840705

    Hahaha, pending UFA you say?

  50. book¡je says:

    Maybe we will see a signing announcement regarding Scrivens today as well?

  51. stevezie says:

    Marcus Oilerius: Hendricks has negative value.

    This was my initial assessment as well, but there are those who passionately defend him. Bookje also raises a good point- we might have had to bribe Nashville not to beat our Scrivens offer.

    EDIT: True, he might suck, but if he does the point we must never forget, and say it with me now: All it will do is cost Katz money. We don’t care about that, we care about the team. The team gambled Katz’ money on finding a 4th line anchor (some say he is good enough to play up in the line-up, but the stats sure don’t show that).

    Rich teams are foolish not to use their money to their advantage. For the time being, we are rich.

  52. Caramel Obvious says:

    Another way of looking at this is that Hendricks is a better version of Ryan Jones. If you adjust for zone starts (using a .15 coefficient) this is what you get for their adjusted shooting percentage for the last two years:

    Hendricks: 46 and 49
    Jones: 46 and 45

    If Hendricks is a better penalty killer, can play center, and can fight, this is a clear upgrade to the roster.

  53. Bag of Pucks says:

    Especially this season, Dubnyk looked like a tender who’s confidence was shot. He was no longer making saves, as much as he was simply moving positionally in the net and letting shots hit him. This was a goaltender with a LOT of weaknesses (average lateral movement, poor rebound control, not vocal with his D corps) and the opposition had a clear book on him. Get it high stick side and you’re golden.

    Really looking forward to seeing what Scrivens brings. With the downsizing of the goalie pads, I hope we’re moving back somewhat towards the importance of the ‘reflex’ goalie. The Colossus goalie that simply acts as a movable wall is very boring to watch. Much prefer the reflex acrobat guys like Tim Thomas and Quick, and of course, Fuhr and Mooger.

  54. Ducey says:

    I see that Hendricks had 219 hits two years ago. 92 in 44 games this year. You can debate the usefulness of hitting but that should make him popular here.

  55. Fixall with Rexall says:

    So this is MacTs Smitheson?

  56. Bar_Qu says:

    steveb12344,

    What it signals is the degree to which MacT got hosed in the trade.

  57. godot10 says:

    book¡je:

    Also, I think its fair to consider this. Today, both Nashville and Edmonton got a goalie.Maybe Edmonton had to give Nashville a sweet deal to prevent them from beating Edmonton’s trade to LA.In other words, the two deals need to be looked at together.

    Excellent point!

  58. steveb12344 says:

    Bar_Qu:
    steveb12344,

    What it signals is the degree to which MacT got hosed in the trade.

    Give Jimmy a chance.

    He is definitely not J. Smithson.

  59. Ducey says:

    Bar_Qu:
    steveb12344,

    What it signals is the degree to which MacT got hosed in the trade.

    Scrivens with a .935 save % is worth a third. What in the world do you think DD with his .894 was worth?

  60. TeeVee says:

    OilClog:
    I think Schultz will still land a 2nd those top teams near the deadline will drive the price up even if it is Nultz.

    So essentially, if we get a 2nd for Nultz that would mean we traded Gilbert/Paajarvi/Dubnyk/3rd for Hendricks/Perron/Scrivens???

  61. RexLibris says:

    The add of Scrivens now sets up another question down the road. If he falters I think the organization needs to look at Chabot.

    MacTavish alluded to this in the summer when he talked about European goaltending gurus.

    Essentially now the Oilers have traded Ladislav Smid, Dubnyk and a 3rd round pick for Horak, Brossoit, and Scrivens with Bryzgalov’s value to be determined but likely to mitigate the cost of the 3rd round pick.

    I don’t mind the deals, but there is the appearance that a lot of action is taking place for modestly positive results.

    As I count them, the Oilers have the following as UFAs now: Hemsky, N. Schultz, Belov, Jones, Potter, Bryzgalov, and Smyth. From that collection they need to recoup a 2nd and a 3rd round pick at least as well as one warm body.

    MacTavish is going to be a very, very busy man during the Olympic break and those days between the end of it and the trade deadline.

    LT, you better get some rest in February. ;)

  62. G Money says:

    stevezie: some say he is good enough to play up in the line-up, but the stats sure don’t show that

    An important interpretive point: we don’t know whether the stats show that or not. They point that way, but tough to deconstruct it well enough to be conclusive.

    The lousy Corsi may be indicative simply of a poor possession player, or perhaps a formerly good one now starting a Belangerian slide, and it won’t matter where you play him.

    It could also suggest that we’ve got a decent fourth liner, capable of holding his own against other fourth lines, who has been asked to play on the third line and in that situation is not able to hold his own.

    Let’s hope it’s the latter.

    It’s actually a classic Oiler problem – decent players (Petry, Ference come to mind) asked to play one or two levels higher than they should, and unsurprisingly struggling.

    WWE version: “Don’t hate the player, hate The Game”
    Oiler version: “Don’t blame the player, blame The Oilers”

  63. TeeVee says:

    Marcus Oilerius:
    stevezie,

    Hendricks has negative value.

    There’s no way Hendricks would fetch a 3rd round, 4th round, or even 6th round pick.He’s old, he wasn’t good to begin with, he’s fading, and he’s got a significant cap hit for a 4th-liner ($1.85m) for another 3 years.

    Mike Brown fetched a 4th.

  64. RexLibris says:

    book¡je:
    Maybe we will see a signing announcementregarding Scrivens today as well?

    My guess is MacTavish asked Lombardi for permission to at least speak to Scrivens’ agent about his willingness to sign in Edmonton.

    If he refuses to sign before the deadline, one has to believe that Scrivens is a more marketable asset at the deadline than Dubnyk based on his body of work with L.A.

  65. icecastles says:

    Help me out, folks: there was a brilliant article somewhere not long ago, looking at Smid’s performance in Calgary and his WOWY both in Edmonton and Calg this year. Checked Cult of Hockey and MC79, but can’t remember where it’s from or who wrote it.

  66. Caramel Obvious says:

    For context Boyd Gordon’s zone start adjusted shot percentage the last two years is 53 and 51.

    Smithson: 44 last year. Clearly worse.

  67. steveb12344 says:

    icecastles:
    Help me out, folks: there was a brilliant article somewhere not long ago, looking at Smid’s performance in Calgary and his WOWY both in Edmonton and Calg this year. Checked Cult of Hockey and MC79, but can’t remember where it’s from or who wrote it.

    That was Willis at OilerNation.

    http://oilersnation.com/2014/1/14/did-craig-mactavish-move-ladislav-smid-to-calgary-just-in-time

  68. G Money says:

    Caramel Obvious: Interesting note on Hendricks. His corsi percentage this year is poor. However his shot percentage is 47.4% which in the context of 42% zone starts is pretty close to 50%. I’ll take that.
    So the question is which number do you choose to believe?

    You’ll have to explain why you feel this is significant? The numbers on Hendrick are 43.3, 43.8, and 47.4 (CF%, FF%, SF%). FF is CF with blocked shots removed. SF is FF with missed shots removed.

    What it means is that Hendricks and his teammates aren’t blocking a lot of shots (only 0.5% differential CF to FF), but the opposition *is* missing a lot of shots. Do you believe that something Hendricks is doing is responsible for causing the opposition to miss more shots than otherwise?

  69. Caramel Obvious says:

    G Money,

    Well the corsi percentage is really different than the shot percentage for Hendricks this year. So what the stats tell us depends upon how we interpret this difference.

  70. Caramel Obvious says:

    G Money: You’ll have to explain why you feel this is significant?The numbers on Hendrick are 43.3, 43.8, and 47.4 (CF%, FF%, SF%).FF is CF with blocked shots removed.SF is FF with missed shots removed.

    What it means is that Hendricks and his teammates aren’t blocking a lot of shots (only 0.5% differential CF to FF), but the opposition *is* missing a lot of shots.Do you believe that something Hendricks is doing is responsible for causing the opposition to miss more shots than otherwise?

    That’s it exactly. It tells us the opposition is missing a lot of shots. We can’t know for certain from a far why this is.

    One possibility, and the most likely in my opinion, is that the shots attempted are from further away.

  71. Henry says:

    G Money: You’ll have to explain why you feel this is significant?The numbers on Hendrick are 43.3, 43.8, and 47.4 (CF%, FF%, SF%).FF is CF with blocked shots removed.SF is FF with missed shots removed.

    What it means is that Hendricks and his teammates aren’t blocking a lot of shots (only 0.5% differential CF to FF), but the opposition *is* missing a lot of shots.Do you believe that something Hendricks is doing is responsible for causing the opposition to miss more shots than otherwise?

    Hendricks made Rinne so huge that there is no corner to try to pick?

  72. icecastles says:

    steveb12344,

    Fantastic, thanks!

  73. Pouzar says:

    I love quotes of Save% coupled with ridiculously minute sample sizes.
    And no, it’s not all we have to evaluate goalies. We have these things called eyes.
    A lot of people here need to read Cory Pronmans “Evaluating Goaltenders And Goaltending Prospects” and stop quoting Save% like it means anything.

    http://www.hockeyprospectus.com/puck/article.php?articleid=1598

    ” Gabriel Desjardins, who has done analysis for several front offices, says you need four full years of performance before a goaltender’s save percentage become reliable enough to evaluate due to how random save percentage is. Awad showed that in one season with at least 40 games played, only 33% of a goaltender’s save percentage is observable skill, while 66% is due to random chance. Over three seasons, that latter number only comes down to 50%. Even when you get years worth of data, outside of the very good and very poor goaltenders, three quarters of goaltenders in the NHL have performance that is “almost indistinguishable” when you get a reliable amount of years.”

    Now anyone care to give me a scouting report on Scrivens? cause I know Doob-nick sucks.

  74. Lowetide says:

    Pouzar:
    I love quotes of Save% coupled with ridiculously minute sample sizes.
    And no, it’s not all we have to evaluate goalies. We have these things called eyes.
    A lot of people here need to read Cory Pronmans “Evaluating Goaltenders And Goaltending Prospects” and stop quoting Save% like it means anything.

    http://www.hockeyprospectus.com/puck/article.php?articleid=1598

    ” Gabriel Desjardins, who has done analysis for several front offices,saysyou need four full years of performance before a goaltender’s save percentage become reliable enough to evaluate due to how random save percentage is. Awadshowedthat in one season with at least 40 games played, only 33% of a goaltender’s save percentage is observable skill, while 66% is due to random chance. Over three seasons, that latter number only comes down to 50%. Even when you get years worth of data, outside of the very good and very poor goaltenders, three quarters of goaltenders in the NHL have performance that is “almost indistinguishable”when you get a reliable amount of years.”

    Now anyone care to give me a scouting report on Scrivens? cause I know Doob-nick sucks.

    I think Scrivens and Dubnyk could very well be equal in terms of quality. MacT couldn’t bring Dubnyk back, because if he did and it failed, that would end him. As difficult as this situation may appear, the Scrivens for Dubnyk portion of this deal is as positive as we can hope for imo.

    Now, the next question: who is the other goalie?

  75. RexLibris says:

    Pouzar,

    He’s got poise.

  76. RexLibris says:

    Lowetide,

    Rantta as the future considerations for the Labarbera trade?

    Don’t crush my hopes, here LT.

    :)

  77. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    have to sign Scrivens…

    But… I wonder, what trades for NHL players do for our chance to get Draisaitl?
    ;)

  78. G Money says:

    Pouzar: cause I know Doob-nick sucks

    You do not see the massive self-contradiction in your post?

  79. FPB94 says:

    So. He’s been excellent the last 2 years and we traded DD for Matt Hendricks?

    Fair enough. Good call.

  80. Pouzar says:

    G Money: You do not see the massive self-contradiction in your post?

    Nope.

  81. VanOil says:

    Woodguy:
    So the Oilers bringing in Hendricks tells me that:

    1) MacT doesn’t like Lander much

    2) Gagner may have played his last game as a C on the OIlers

    Does Gagner to NYI for Brock Nelson + 2nd make sense? Or must Gags bring back one of the two Dman we need and we put all our eggs in the German Cowboys basket? (Dry Saddle)

  82. auzy11 says:

    I like what is happening,as things had to start changing of that there is no doubt,it appears as the baby steps have started,i see a couple more deals coming that might surprise some of us. All in all in this town any hockey move is a good one,just look at the team,we can look at it later and say what did he do,but for now its like any move is a good one. Good for you Mct

  83. G Money says:

    Pouzar,

    OK then. I will leave you with two quotes from the article you reference, and you can connect the dots with your statement about Dubnyk.

    “Therefore, barring extremely good or extremely bad seasons, it is almost impossible to dissect anything meaningful from single season goalie numbers with current statistics.”

    “If the stats are not reliable, one may say to just trust the scouts. However, amateur scouts have historically fared just as poorly as the NHL statistics in terms of evaluating goaltenders.”

  84. auzy11 says:

    I see Gags going to the hawks for some reason,,,very close with Kane,i could be wrong,but i feel Ebs is gone pure and simple,they will get a good return for him. They could both go,and think they will,the team has to change,enough of the young guy stuff,and they had better do something with Yak,,,as he will go to KHL….you cannot lose 1st round picks…you just cant

  85. book¡je says:

    The other issue here is that the key players on the Oilers were no doubt getting restless. If Scrivens comes in and posts a 0.920 from here on out, maybe Hall, Eberle, RNH, Yak, and others see a light at the end of the tunnel.

  86. delooper says:

    book¡je:
    The other issue here is that the key players on the Oilers were no doubt getting restless. If Scrivens comes in and posts a 0.920 from here on out, maybe Hall, Eberle, RNH, Yak, and others see a light at the end of the tunnel.

    That’s pretty hopeful. Going from a team with a strong established defensive system to the Oilers, it would be near impossible for any goalie to maintain their save percentage.

  87. freedomisamyth says:

    Typical. Trade made. Everyone consults their stats for this year and decries it as an outrage and oh how terrible. MacT should be fired.

    Nevermind that just last year Hendricks was good enough to get this ‘albatross’ contract. The stats don’t say he’s awesome, so he must suck. Nevermind that sometimes, a player doesn’t fit in a new situation and it just doesn’t work out – he must be on the belanger decline and he’ll be bought out at the end of the season! He’s only got 2 goals on the season! Another guy who won’t bring anything to the table.

    Nevermind that Dubnyk is a UFA goaltender who has had a terrible season. he should have gotten a 2nd? Dubnyk might have gotten a 2nd if he was playing his usual average, but when he is been a sieve? The way he is been playing, how is he an upgrade on any competent backup in the league? Fine if you believe he can recover (Which I do), but it won’t be this year, and he’s UFA, so what’s the point>

    I really wish people would stop stating things so definitively when they’ve never watched the player, and only have stats to go on. I realize none of us can watch all the players in the league intently and have actually educated opinions on things, but the stats are not the be all and end all. The stats we have available are a nice tool to go along with actually watching a player, but they are not the definitive be all and end all definition of a player. The stats can be skewed by so many things, that they absolutely cannot be used as gospel. You have to use multiple stats to get even a basic picture of what’s really going on, and even then, it’s still up to interpretation.

    It’s fine to have an opinion based mostly on stats, but is it possible for people to not go off the handle before a game has ever been played, just based on whatever cherry picked stats they want to use?

  88. Hammers says:

    Basically we got Scrivens for DD both similar players but DD played for US not LA . It had to happen so this is as good a bet as you could make . Resigning DD would have crucified McT but signing Scrivens gives him leeway . As for Hendriks he probably ends up on the 3rd line and that won’t mean the end of Lander or Arco . I like what I see and hope Eakins uses them both right away. Anybody heard how Hemsky is ??? They keep playing like this and I may just stay in Mexico .

  89. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Willis on Hendricks:

    http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/2014/01/15/edmonton-oilers-trade-devan-dubnyk-matt-hendricks/

    ———-
    Gregor and Brownlee going full on “use your eyes and watch the game!” (direct quote) on Petry.

    Radio!

  90. Bar_Qu says:

    Ducey,

    I like the Scrivens trade, but it doesn’t make up for the horrific Hendricks trade. Not only is it a bad straight-across deal, but the Oil kept salary. It signals a clear mis-understanding of the value of the player acquired. The Oilers did the Preds a favor taking Hendricks off their hands, on top of giving them a goalie who will immediately play better in their system, behind their D.

  91. book¡je says:

    delooper: That’s pretty hopeful.Going from a team with a strong established defensive system to the Oilers, it would be near impossible for any goalie to maintain their save percentage.

    Dubnyk managed it last year and Scrivens is currently at a 0.931.

  92. rickithebear says:

    Woodguy:

    Hendricks looks like a decent PKer, but he gets too much $$$ for too long for a 32 year old.

    MacT wanted a Clarkson
    Clarkson 35GM 3g 5A -6 7yr @ 5.25M
    hendricks 42GM 2G 2A -5 4yr @1.85M
    Mact is getting smarter!

  93. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    delooper: That’s pretty hopeful.Going from a team with a strong established defensive system to the Oilers, it would be near impossible for any goalie to maintain their save percentage.

    There is very little to suggest defensive systems (good, bad, otherwise) have an effect on SV%

    http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/2012/07/10/is-dave-tippett-responsible-for-the-rise-of-mike-smith-and-the-fall-of-ilya-bryzgalov/

    http://nhlnumbers.com/2012/7/17/goaltenders-with-and-without-ken-hitchcock

    http://nhlnumbers.com/2012/8/11/the-dave-tippett-effect

    http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2013/7/16/4529962/nhl-save-percentage-tippett-hitchcock-goaltenders-statistical-team-effects-ondrej-pavelec

  94. Bar_Qu says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    I don’t see anything but positives in the race for 30th with today’s moves. (go team Draisaitl!)

    I think Scrivens plays well, but we will see his numbers drop (mainly the GAA) because there is not a set of D playing at their established level on the Oilers. They will try and they will fall short. And in the end their will be pundits scratching their head and asking why Scrivens did not play better here.

    I doubt many will question the system at all.

  95. denny33 says:

    Fixall with Rexall,

    Would love to see the reaction if it was Tamby acquiring Hendricks..

  96. denny33 says:

    Ducey,

    3rd round draft pick.

  97. Well Oiled and Enthusiastic says:

    Well…the chamber is comfortably loaded and the trigger knuckle is getting increasingly white. Should be some rapid fire over next number of weeks. I must give MacT credit, his work on Horcoff and now Dubnyk has been exemplary GM work. Dubnyk was an absolute train wreck this year and a pending UFA to boot. To muster anything for him is impressive. MacT has been progressively mopping up the slop and tightening the edges. The material hockey trades are to come.

    I think Lander marinating in the AHL for a couple more years is exactly what we want to see. I don’t think they have turned their backs on him at all. If we aspire to a proper development system, this is EXACTLY what I want to see unfolding. Lander may not feel that way, but I hope this organizational philosophy is now bedrock in this new regime.

  98. Ducey says:

    Bar_Qu:
    Ducey,

    I like the Scrivens trade, but it doesn’t make up for the horrific Hendricks trade. Not only is it a bad straight-across deal, but the Oil kept salary. It signals a clear mis-understanding of the value of the player acquired. The Oilers did the Preds a favor taking Hendricks off their hands, on top of giving them a goalie who will immediately play better in their system, behind their D.

    1. You likely can’t have the Scrivens trade without dumping a goalie
    2. Who cares if the Oilers retain salary? They are well below the cap. It makes zero difference to the team they ice.
    3. DD was likely worth maybe a 6th? What are the odds that the 6th would be as good as Hendricks ? 5%? You get Hendricks now. You get a rookie in 3 years if the 5% works out.
    4. Mike Brown was traded for a 4th. A guy like Hendricks has value.
    5. Hendricks’ contract is nothing. They would have to have a live warm body in his spot anyway. This is likely to cost $900,000 or so. You going to get outraged over an extra $950K?
    6. Tha Cap is going up fast anyway.
    7. What DD does with the Preds makes no difference here. Its what he wasn’t doing with the Oilers that matters.

    In short, with all due respect, I think you miss the boat on your criticism (calling it horrific) here. I am not saying Hendricks is going to be a difference maker, but he is likely about all that DD was worth.

  99. Ducey says:

    rickithebear: MacT wanted a Clarkson
    Clarkson 35GM 3g 5A -6 7yr @ 5.25M
    hendricks 42GM 2G 2A -54yr@1.85M
    Mact is getting smarter!

    Ha! That is a nice comparison.

  100. НИНТЕНДО⁶⁴ says:

    book¡je:
    The other issue here is that the key players on the Oilers were no doubt getting restless. If Scrivens comes in and posts a 0.920 from here on out, maybe Hall, Eberle, RNH, Yak, and others see a light at the end of the tunnel.

    When management worries out loud about the skaters having lost confidence in a goalie they’re worrying silently that a new contract for that goalie would lose them the owner’s confidence.

  101. denny33 says:

    Hammers,

    Basically we got Scrivens for DD both similar players but DD played for US not LA . It had to happen so this is as good a bet as you could make . Resigning DD would have crucified McT but signing Scrivens gives him leeway . As for Hendriks he probably ends up on the 3rd line ….

    ***********************************************************************************

    Probably ends up on the 3rd line….

    Hendricks has 2 goals this year.
    5 last year.
    4 the prior year.

    I thought Mac T had some thoughts on guys that could not score goals and the best you could hope for was they were not going to be scored upon….

    Hendricks has only taken 26 draws this year….

  102. delooper says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: There is very little to suggest defensive systems (good, bad, otherwise) have an effect on SV%

    Those articles don’t seem to give a clear indication either way, to me. Is there any cleaner data on this kind of thing?

  103. Snowman says:

    This is how I see the Hendricks trade

    Preds wanted a goalie, probably also spoke to LAK about Scrivens, they have a contract they don’t want in Hendricks.

    MacT sees Scrivens as at least as good as Dubnyk (and probably better), gives Preds DD and takes their bad contract so that the Preds don’t get Scrivens. We upgrade (hopefully) our goalie tandem immediately. Get a serviceable (hopefully) veteran 4th liner with some toughness and PK skills. Gives MacT some time to develop prospects (Lander).

    Not a huge win but a solid smaller move thats good for the immediate and longer term future. Dare I say that this has some forethought that is not usually seen from Oiler Management (despite the bad contract Hendricks brings)?

  104. Ryan says:

    delooper: Those articles don’t seem to give a clear indication either way, to me. Is there any cleaner data on this kind of thing?

    It’s always been murky, but I read a great article on puck prospectus back in 09-10 that showed a slight impact, they called it the Lemaire effect or something.

    I’d love to give you the link, but I’d have to look for it.

  105. denny33 says:

    Romulus Apotheosis,

    Add to that TSN”s Cullen on the Trade of Hendricks.

    @tsnscottcullen: I like Matt Hendricks as fourth-liner, 9-for-17 in shootouts (52.9%), but retaining Dubnyk $ and taking that contract is hard to justify.

  106. Ryan says:

    Ryan: It’s always been murky, but I read a great article on puck prospectus back in 09-10 that showed a slight impact, they called it the Lemaire effect or something.

    I’d love to give you the link, but I’d have to look for it.

    Found the article: http://www.puckprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=247

    with more here:
    http://behindthenet.ca/blog/2009_08_01_archive.html

  107. book¡je says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: There is very little to suggest defensive systems (good, bad, otherwise) have an effect on SV%

    http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/2012/07/10/is-dave-tippett-responsible-for-the-rise-of-mike-smith-and-the-fall-of-ilya-bryzgalov/

    http://nhlnumbers.com/2012/7/17/goaltenders-with-and-without-ken-hitchcock

    http://nhlnumbers.com/2012/8/11/the-dave-tippett-effect

    http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2013/7/16/4529962/nhl-save-percentage-tippett-hitchcock-goaltenders-statistical-team-effects-ondrej-pavelec

    Do you have any evidence for that, or is it just your opinion. I did a study after watching 3 games 2 years ago (I did it from memory because I forgot my pen and notepad) and I can tell you definitively, save percentage is affected a great deal by defensive systems.

  108. book¡je says:

    Snowman,

    That is how I see it as well.

  109. delooper says:

    Ryan: It’s always been murky, but I read a great article on puck prospectus back in 09-10 that showed a slight impact, they called it the Lemaire effect or something.

    I’d love to give you the link, but I’d have to look for it.

    I feel pretty sure there has to be *some* effect. It’s a question of quantifying its magnitude. I’m sure most of us have played hockey at various levels. We all know how different it is to play in a slummy beer league full of angry old men vs. fit high-school students vs. a university club team. The quality of the players around you and the system they play has a huge impact on your own performance. It feels like a completely different game, playing with people who know how to play effectively.

    So I’ve got a fair bit of personal bias coming into this. This seems like a tricky thing to quantify. You’d have to go through goalie trades and check the quality of the team D, and to whatever extent you can, how their defensive system makes life easier for the goalie. Back when the Oilers last made it to the playoffs they had a system where they let opposition teams gets lots of low-quality shots. That certainly would make goaltenders look good.

  110. book¡je says:

    I would add that perhaps LA indicated that Nashville were willing to give up their 2nd round pick to LA and MacT told Nashville that they would eat $$$s if they would take Dubnyk. Our poor sisters to the south save some cash and Katz eats it up with Salary for DD and a buyout for Hendriks if he looks bad by the summer.

  111. book¡je says:

    delooper,

    Beer League to College league is not the same as pro team to pro team I suspect.

  112. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    delooper: Those articles don’t seem to give a clear indication either way, to me. Is there any cleaner data on this kind of thing?

    Seems pretty conclusive to me.

    Willis and Charon, in a limited look, discover that any benefit is marginal at best. AIH takes a closer look and comes to this conclusion:

    The best defensive-minded coaches improved their goaltenders by 0.004 and 0.006 save percentage and even that seems to be predominately due to “luck” (ie: variance) than anything else. It is most likely than that these coaches are improving their goaltenders even less than this, if at all.

  113. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    Of course, you can ask the question the other way too:

    http://www.broadstreethockey.com/2013/7/4/4487304/save-percentage-variability-regression-defense

    on forwards’ ability to impact sv%:

    If there are differences between players in their ability to influence the opponents’ shooting percentage, those differences are much less than whatever other random factors come into play.

    Making judgments about forwards’ defense based on how many goals are scored against their team with them on the ice is a mistake. It gives the player credit or blame for save percentages that have zero predictive value and therefore makes the ratings significantly worse than they would be if we used only the shot totals.

    On D:

    Even if we assume that this correlation is real, our best estimate of future on-ice save percentage would be regressed 85% of the way back to the mean — which means the projections for those guys way out at 93.7% over a three-year span would be just two tenths of a point above the mean. And the individual talent the player possesses would be even lower than that; playing in certain rinks or with certain goalies or in certain systems could have an impact that large.

    So while there may be a sliver of repeatable talent for defensemen preventing the opponents from getting high-percentage shots, after three years of data we aren’t even close to being able to reliably tell who’s good at it.

    And like with forwards, making judgments about defensemen based on the number of goals scored against them is a mistake that ends up crediting or blaming the player for factors entirely out of their control.

  114. Jujhar says:

    book¡je: I would add that perhaps LA indicated that Nashville were willing to give up their 2nd round pick to LA and MacT told Nashville that they would eat $$$s if they would take Dubnyk. Our poor sisters to the south save some cash and Katz eats it up with Salary for DD and a buyout for Hendriks if he looks bad by the summer.

    Cant buy out Hendricks as he signed after the lockout.

  115. G Money says:

    book¡je: Do you have any evidence for that, or is it just your opinion.

    Hey! Keep your data loss mockery to yourself, or I’ll be forced to calculate your standard deviation and integrate it with the k-th dimension of your Hausdorff space!

  116. delooper says:

    Romulus Apotheosis: Seems pretty conclusive to me.

    Willis and Charon, in a limited look, discover that any benefit is marginal at best. AIH takes a closer look and comes to this conclusion:

    Meh, that looks like a not very methodical comparison. It’s making the comparison by coach names rather than by actual systems. There’s too much slop in that kind of analysis: what was the actual system employed, were players implementing it well or not, etc. The shot-location comparison article Ryan linked to, I find that quite informative. It shows systems can have serious impacts on shot quality.

  117. Bar_Qu says:

    Ducey: 1. You likely can’t have the Scrivens trade without dumping a goalie
    2. Who cares if the Oilers retain salary?They are well below the cap.It makes zero difference to the team they ice.
    3. DD was likely worth maybe a 6th?What are the odds that the 6th would be as good as Hendricks ?5%?You get Hendricks now.You get a rookie in 3 years if the 5% works out.
    4. Mike Brown was traded for a 4th.A guy like Hendricks has value.
    5. Hendricks’ contract is nothing.They would have to have a live warm body in his spot anyway.This is likely to cost $900,000 or so.You going to get outraged over an extra $950K?
    6.Tha Cap is going up fast anyway.
    7. What DD does with the Preds makes no difference here.Its what he wasn’t doing with the Oilers that matters.

    In short, with all due respect, I think you miss the boat on your criticism (calling it horrific) here.I am not saying Hendricks is going to be a difference maker, but he is likely about all that DD was worth.

    1. You can actually. Either carry 3 goalies or demote Dubnyk. Maybe he gets picked up on waivers, but maybe not. Reputation carries a lot of weight with GMs.

    2. Not relevant to what I am arguing.

    3. Getting Hendricks is worse than getting a 6th. You have to pay him for 3 more seasons. Dollars that won’t go to paying a useful player.

    4. Hendricks doesn’t have value. He has negative value (for a struggling team) tho a top team like SJ who can afford to have him sit most of the season might be able to use him. The Oilers already have a Hendricks-type of lesser quality in Ben Eager. Did they really need another guy who won’t live up to his contract?

    5. Cap $s misses the point. The GM of our team got fleeced for a marginal player signed on a NK quality contract (“like the player hate the contract” type). This signals a blind-spot in MacT’s thinking process, one that has existed in this org for a while, which many of us here had gone away with his hiring.

    6. Cap can’t go up enough to justify this bad contract. It is another GM’s signing mistake and the Oilers overpaid for it.

    7. I can’t disagree with you. But it will come up in discussion the next time the Oilers play against him (in Nashville or elsewhere), he looks great and people will say “why didn’t he play like this in Edmonton?” Completing forgetting that he did play like that before this year.

    I understand the Oilers dropping Dubnyk. What I can’t understand is how you lose a trade to a team that needs a goalie. Get their 3rd and balance out what you are giving up to LA, at least.

  118. Traktor says:

    Gagner next?

  119. rickithebear says:

    Romulus Apotheosis:
    Of course, you can ask the question the other way too:

    http://www.broadstreethockey.com/2013/7/4/4487304/save-percentage-variability-regression-defense

    on forwards’ ability to impact sv%:

    On D:

    Go to Some kind of Ninja!
    look at the Dmen from LAK, ANA, SJS, STL, CHI, BOS,
    Shots against Away and Home. 0-10ft 10-20ft; 20-30ft; +30FT
    then do it for there goalies.

    Then do the bottom Six Ga nhl teams.

    It will be a good education!

  120. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    This long comment from Eric T. in the comments to the last article is also very interesting.

    It seems that a tiny sliver of NHL D may have an impact, but even in that case, it is hard to eliminate randomness and regression:

    http://www.broadstreethockey.com/2013/7/4/4487304/save-percentage-variability-regression-defense#171597351

  121. G Money says:

    delooper: Back when the Oilers last made it to the playoffs they had a system where they let opposition teams gets lots of low-quality shots. That certainly would make goaltenders look good.

    Parkatti’s EG work captures shot type and distance in addition to shot quantity. That’s probably the most objective measure you’re going to find of measurable results for D quality (which you would assume would limit shot chances) and D style (which might trade shots for distance).

    If you can find the equivalent for the Kings, you can get a sense of whether Scrivens’ sv% is inflated. A simple measure might just be to calculate EG minus actual non-empty-net goals each game, and you’d get a zero-centered number which means you could average or you could sum. The bigger the positive number, the more likely that the save % is real, a zero or negative number would suggest a combination of D system and good fortune.

  122. PunjabiOil says:

    I’m not going to lie and pretend I know much about Hendricks. A few comments:

    1. He had the 3rd most PK minutes in Nashville. I haven’t looked at whether he’s an effective PK’er, but he’s doing alot of it, and I suspect that carries some weight.
    2. I see this as more of a replacement for Joensuu (bust) or Ryan Jones (1.5M).
    3. We have to adjust our expectations a bit for cap hit. 1.8M no isn’t 1.8M a guy like Ethan Moreau got 6 years ago.
    4. A bonus is he’s good in shootouts – and face-offs.
    5. 92 hits, by far more than anyone on the Oilers. This is what they want, rightly or wrongly, to add some size and grit into the lineup.
    _______________

    Scrivens

    1. Math likes him. That said, Math also liked Dubnyk and Labarbera – must be cautious about using SV% in a vacuum.
    2. A trial balloon until the end of the season to see if he’s a legitimate starter
    3. Regardless, need to add another goalie. Reimer/Elliott for a 1A and 1B spot
    4. Not overly concerned about a 3rd round pick. A calculated gamble that can pay dividends at a higher rate than what a 3rd round pick likely would. I suspect they will recoup some of these picks during the deadline

  123. stevezie says:

    Jujhar: Cant buy out Hendricks as he signed after the lockout.

    No, you just can’t compliance buyout him. We could still do a regular buyout.

  124. Oilanderp says:

    I’m overjoyed that we have a fourth liner who has a nickname stemming from his own patented shootout move: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pb5A4Ri2iZo

    The Paralyzer!

  125. PunjabiOil says:

    AsiaOil probably will never post again.

  126. Captain Smarmy says:

    The Dubnyk trades looks rather terrible but then again Dubnyk is terrible and I don’t really care about any roster player under two million. They can even buy him out if they want to for whatever reason.

    But that Scrivens trade… man might have to lift the boycott.

  127. delooper says:

    Dubnyk and Smid were two of my favourite Oilers.

  128. delooper says:

    PunjabiOil:
    4.A bonus is he’s good in shootouts – and face-offs.

    Now if only the Oilers could be competitive-enough to get to a few more shootouts, they might be able to use those talents!

  129. Melman says:

    Jujhar,

    Are you sure? Can’t you buy him out and take the cap/salary hit? If not send him to OKC if he’s horrible

  130. Romulus Apotheosis says:

    delooper: Meh, that looks like a not very methodical comparison.It’s making the comparison by coach names rather than by actual systems.There’s too much slop in that kind of analysis: what was the actual system employed, were players implementing it well or not, etc.The shot-location comparison article Ryan linked to, I find that quite informative. It shows systems can have serious impacts on shot quality.

    Some of your questions I’m really not sure we can answer. They certainly aren’t questions we will find answers for in the publicly available data.

    I think it is fair to say that these kinds of heuristic articles that respond to narratives in the media often end up being pushed further than their limited origins allow for — I’ve probably done that here.

    In those cases examined, at any rate, it certainly seems hard to argue their results are inconclusive.

    The GD article on the Wild is interesting though.

  131. book¡je says:

    Lowetide:
    Sail On, Kamloops Blazer

    http://oilersnation.com/2014/1/15/sail-on-kamloops-blazer

    I thought ‘Sail On’ posts were for the lowetide.ca site. Now we have to go over there and contend with ‘those people’

  132. gcw_rocks says:

    Credit where it is due, the Scriven’s trade is worth the risk. While I was happy to puke on the Dubnyk trade in the other thread, I give MacT credit for swinging this deal. I thought Scrivens would go for more.

    I don’t buy into the theory these trades have to be linked though. The Oilers would have been better off making the Scriven trade and waiving Dubnyk. Odds are the Islanders would have grabbed him if the Preds didn’t.

  133. Ducey says:

    Lowetide:
    Sail On, Kamloops Blazer

    http://oilersnation.com/2014/1/15/sail-on-kamloops-blazer

    I got a kick out of this comment there: Nice one Lowetide. I find old guys are the best at doing eulogies, probably because they are so close to dying that they want to build up good will for when someone is doing it for them. Anyways Good Luck Dubnyk.

    I think it was intended as a compliment :)

  134. Lowetide says:

    Traktor:
    Gagner next?

    You’d have to think so, get ‘er done!

  135. book¡je says:

    Melman:
    Jujhar,

    Are you sure?Can’t you buy him out and take the cap/salary hit?If not send him to OKC if he’s horrible

    Yes you can, but you can’t use a compliance buyout.

  136. Ducey says:

    delooper:
    Dubnyk and Smid were two of my favourite Oilers.

    Can you start liking Gagner, Bryz, Nultz and Jones?

  137. delooper says:

    Ducey: Can you start liking Gagner, Bryz, Nultz and Jones?

    Man… Hemsky is my favourite. And Ryan Smyth. Sigh….

  138. fifthcartel says:

    Scrivens auditioning, and Oilers searching for another goalie + another Cam Ward mentioned by Dreger.

  139. Bag of Pucks says:

    Ducey: Can you start liking Gagner, Bryz, Nultz and Jones?

    Very rare that a post on the Interweb makes me laugh out loud, but that one did the trick.

    Well played sir.

  140. stevezie says:

    If this team with these players features Matt Hendricks in their top 3 shootout options… Well life is funny sometimes.

    They would be crazy not to.

  141. Derek says:

    Just because Dubnyk had poor value this season and was going to be a UFA at seasons end doesn’t mean you have to trade him for a player with poor underlying numbers and a bad contract.

    Just because the cap is going up doesn’t mean you have to waste cap dollars on fourth line centers that can hit for 4 years, to get rid of a goaltender who was going to be gone in 40 games in a nothing season anyway.

    Edmonton would’ve been better off trading Dubnyk for a 7th and then making the Scrivens move.

    Scrivens is a gamble as it is.

  142. hoser313 says:

    Thoughts:

    1) Like the Scrivens signing. The Oil are stacked on Cam Abney types drafted in the 3rd round in the system (but I’ll come back to that).

    2) I have no doubt the shine will come off Scrivens’ numbers as it has for Bryz and Labarbera. I hope he is good at stopping 2 on 1′s and reacting to pucks tipped by his own defencemen.

    3) Will be interesting to see if his numbers with the Oil normalize close to the numbers of DD and Bryz.

    4) Was the Dubnyk trade even necessary? I would say not. Cap space was used unnecessarily. I’m sure Hendricks is a good soldier but to me this is Jerred Smithson all over again. There should be a small army of guys already in the Oil system who will challenge for cheap, 4th line spots next year.

  143. Romulus Apotheosis says:
  144. Ducey says:

    hoser313:
    Thoughts:

    4) Was the Dubnyk trade even necessary?I would say not.Cap space was used unnecessarily.I’m sure Hendricks is a good soldier but to me this is Jerred Smithson all over again.There should be a small army of guys already in the Oil system who will challenge for cheap, 4th line spots next year.

    Who? All they have in that role in OKC with any potential is Kessy and Ewanyk. They are still years away. You are going to put Mitch Moroz in a fourth line role as a pro rookie?

    I can’t understand how the same fans that clamour for actual NHL players and for MacT to upgrade the team would rather have a draft pick or nothing.

    Moroz would cost $900,000. People think that saving $950,000 in cap space is worth worrying over? Are Katz’s accountants posting here?

  145. stevezie says:

    Bar_Qu: 1. You can actually. Either carry 3 goalies or demote Dubnyk. Maybe he gets picked up on waivers, but maybe not. Reputation carries a lot of weight with GMs.

    2. Not relevant to what I am arguing.

    3. Getting Hendricks is worse than getting a 6th. You have to pay him for 3 more seasons. Dollars that won’t go to paying a useful player.

    4. Hendricks doesn’t have value. He has negative value (for a struggling team) tho a top team like SJ who can afford to have him sit most of the season might be able to use him. The Oilers already have a Hendricks-type of lesser quality in Ben Eager. Did they really need another guy who won’t live up to his contract?

    5. Cap $s misses the point. The GM of our team got fleeced for a marginal player signed on a NK quality contract (“like the player hate the contract” type). This signals a blind-spot in MacT’s thinking process, one that has existed in this org for a while, which many of us here had gone away with his hiring.

    6. Cap can’t go up enough to justify this bad contract. It is another GM’s signing mistake and the Oilers overpaid for it.

    7. I can’t disagree with you. But it will come up in discussion the next time the Oilers play against him (in Nashville or elsewhere), he looks great and people will say “why didn’t he play like this in Edmonton?” Completing forgetting that he did play like that before this year.

    I understand the Oilers dropping Dubnyk. What I can’t understand is how you lose a trade to a team that needs a goalie. Get their 3rd and balance out what you are giving up to LA, at least.

    The funny thing is I completely agree with the foundation of what you are saying, 1) Nashville got a lot of things they needed in this trade, we should have been able to get more out of them, and 2) Rule #1 is don’t kill your cap.
    For discussion sake, however, I’ll admit that I think most of your points are wrong.

    1.) Carrying and paying three goalies is dumb and distracting. We of all fans should know.
    2.) Ducey’s point was very relevant to what you are arguing. Cap space only matters if you need cap space. There are no bonus points awarded to teams who are efficient with money, and it makes total sense to blow your extra dollars if it increases your odds of winning. You win by winning, not saving money.
    3.) I fear that, if you’re not right now, you will be soon. However, a buyout fixes this. So does Eagering him.
    If, on the other hand, Hendricks is a useful player, even for just a season, this trade is a win- as long as they are quick to cut ties!
    4.) Ben Eager doesn’t make anyone redundant. He is the thing that is irrelevant to what we are arguing. Mostly this point is just #3 Redux.
    5.) You might be right here. The best defence is the blind assumption that we were in a race for Scrivens and taking the Preds out of the bidding was an essential move. I have no reason to believe this other than it makes things more sensible.
    6.) Well, this just isn’t true. See #1, and consider how many successful teams had buried, but affordable mistakes. It’s only a big deal if it’s a big deal.
    7.) I think you are underselling yourself here. If Dubby quickly returns to being a starting goalie then it will be on the Oilers (only if it happens quickly- if he’s an all-star 10 years from now that is nobody’s fault).
    However, for PR reasons, it makes sense to swap him for a comparable bet. Scrivens is far from guaranteed (I see him as a strong backup), but I can’t see any reason why he should be considered a worse horse to back than Dubnyk.

    So, there you go. My thoughts. You just take those, put them in your pocket, and take them out on a rainy day.

  146. hoser313 says:

    Ducey: Who?All they have in that role in OKC with any potential is Kessy and Ewanyk.They are still years away.You are going to put Mitch Moroz in a fourth line role as a pro rookie?

    I can’t understand how the same fans that clamour for actual NHL players and for MacT to upgrade the team would rather have a draft pick or nothing.

    Moroz would cost $900,000.People think that saving $950,000 in cap space is worth worrying over?Are Katz’s accountants posting here?

    Scrivens might be an upgrade. That part makes sense.

    Smyth, Jones, Gazdic, Lander, Pitlick, Hamilton, Khaira, yes Moroz, Joensuu, Horak, Acton. Is that not a small army?

  147. G Money says:

    Comparison of Scrivens vs the other LA Kings goalies, sv% by shot distance (green means “better than”, red means “worse than”):

    http://i.imgur.com/1cj5wWf.png

    Not much to dislike, although Scrivens is giving up long distance goals (avg 49.9 ft) at a rate of 4.1%, double the rate of Quick/Jones. Won’t take many of those for the Oiler faithful to turn on him.

  148. hoser313 says:

    hoser313,

    hoser313: Scrivens might be an upgrade.That part makes sense.

    Smyth, Jones, Gazdic, Lander, Pitlick, Hamilton, Khaira, yes Moroz, Joensuu, Horak, Acton.Is that not a small army?

    Having said that, if your point is actually that the team needs a 2nd guy in the line-up who fights regularly, then I agree Hendricks would address that.

  149. Ducey says:

    hoser313: Scrivens might be an upgrade.That part makes sense.

    Smyth, Jones, Gazdic, Lander, Pitlick, Hamilton, Khaira, yes Moroz, Joensuu, Horak, Acton.Is that not a small army?

    They could keep Gadzic, Smyth and Hendricks on the roster together. Jones can go play in the SEL or somewhere. None of those other guys will be better than Hendricks next year.

  150. TheOtherJohn says:

    No difficulty with Scrivens deal. He is definitely worth a look. No clue how with that much $$ tied up in Rinne that Nashville is a serious competitor for Scrivens but….maybe

    Trading DD for a 4L player making $1.85m for 3 more years is asinine. Also @mirtle: Hendricks is the eighth worst possession forward in the NHL this season and appears to be trending downward http://t.co/BEped48txH

    Other than that, its all good

  151. book¡je says:

    TheOtherJohn:
    No difficulty with Scrivens deal. He is definitely worth a look. No clue how with that much $$ tied up in Rinne that Nashville is a serious competitor for Scrivens but….maybe

    His $600,000 contract? I don’t understand how it would be a barrier to trading for Scrivens – they are paying more for Dubnyk.

  152. Ducey says:

    TheOtherJohn:
    No difficulty with Scrivens deal. He is definitely worth a look. No clue how with that much $$ tied up in Rinne that Nashville is a serious competitor for Scrivens but….maybe

    Trading DD for a 4L player making $1.85m for 3 more years is asinine.Also@mirtle: Hendricks is the eighth worst possession forward in the NHL this season and appears to be trending downward http://t.co/BEped48txH

    Other than that, its all good

    Maybe he will improve by .6% and be equal to Taylor Hall.

  153. Pouzar says:

    G Money:
    Pouzar,
    OK then. I will leave you with two quotes from the article you reference, and you can connect the dots with your statement about Dubnyk.
    “Therefore, barring extremely good or extremely bad seasons, it is almost impossible to dissect anything meaningful from single season goalie numbers with current statistics.”
    “If the stats are not reliable, one may say to just trust the scouts. However, amateur scouts have historically fared just as poorly as the NHL statistics in terms of evaluating goaltenders.”

    Your second quote references amateur scouts projecting how amateur goaltenders will perform in the NHL. That is not what I am talking about here. In this case I am talking about pro scouts evaluating present NHL goaltenders and their performance in the NHL in the absence of the requisite sample size to even begin considering Save %.

  154. TheOtherJohn says:

    Ducey: Maybe he will improve by .6% and be equal to Taylor Hall.

    Or maybe Hendricks will do produce exactly like the flotsam and jetsam that were Petrell and Belanger such that they were let go because, in the words of MacT, they were not difference makers in the bottom 6.

    book¡je: His $600,000 contract? I don’t understand how it would be a barrier to trading for Scrivens – they are paying more for Dubnyk.

    Someone suggested that Nashville might have swooped in to trade for Scrivens. Big whoop!! not sure if Oilers trading for Scrivens was for this year but ……In any event with Rinne Nashville cannot affford to resign him as a UFA at $2-3m because of Rinne. So Scrivens hits the FA market if he goes to Nashville or not

    If you are interested in Scrivens sign him as a UFA.At no cost to yourself other than $$.Quite sure that Oilers would bring most $$ in their offer because …… well Oilers

    As to him playing balance of the season in Nashville most teams would actually dedicate a pro scout to watch and report on him regularly. Realize with Oilers that is a double edged sword. We have few pro scouts who can find the rink to observe said goalie and if rink found can file a helpful and accurate report

  155. Caramel Obvious says:

    I don’t understand the angst over these deals, especially from the twitter pundiocracy

    There are really only two important questions.

    1) Is Scrivens better than Dubnyk?
    2) Is Hendricks a better than replacement player? And is the difference between Hendricks and a replacement player

    The answer to the first is a clear yes. While we don’t have perfect information regarding goalies, all the information we do have says that Scrivens is better than Dubnyk.

    The answer to the second is more equivocal. Myself I have a hard time thinking that the next guy available on waivers is going to be better than Hendricks or that there are AHL veterans out there that are better than Hendricks. Considering this, I think the 900K or so of opportunity cost isn’t that significant.

    Myself I’d rather have the payroll flexibility than Hendricks. However, I’d rather have Hendricks than another go at the Will Acton/Ryan Hamilton experience, and I’d rather have Hendricks on the team and Lander on the farm than I’d have Lander on the team and nothing on the farm.

  156. cabbiesmacker says:

    TheOtherJohn:

    Trading DD for a 4L player making $1.85m for 3 more years is asinine.

    Other than that, its all good

    Try my perspective and see if it helps. Traded Dubnyk for Scrivens. Good so far?

    Trading a 3rd for Hendrick’s……ok not so asinine anymore. Boldly dumb perhaps but not asinine.

  157. Andy P says:

    Lowetide: Sail On, Kamloops Blazerhttp://oilersnation.com/2014/1/15/sail-on-kamloops-blazer

    Nice article, LT. I hope that what happened to LT, was a once in a lifetime perfect storm. New baby, yet another new coach, lack of confidence from the GM, a horrible defence that unintentionally hangs you out to dry every night, an incompatible coach? and finally, loss of the confidence by the team itself. All of which may never happen again, that will allow DD to have a good rest of career. Not an exceptional goalie, most likely never a cup winning goalie, but a good goalie nevertheless. But a first class person, really good guy. the kind of fellow who does not appear to have a mean bone in his body.
    Sail on, Devan! Go Well.

  158. Ryan says:

    TheOtherJohn:

    Trading DD for a 4L player making $1.85m for 3 more years is asinine.Also@mirtle: Hendricks is the eighth worst possession forward in the NHL this season and appears to be trending downward http://t.co/BEped48txH

    Lol… Quote of the thread. Well done sir.

    Clearly you don’t get the Toronto model…. :). Hendricks is a building block with Gazdic…. I’m just surprised we didn’t grab sestito off waivers last year to complete the trifecta.

  159. gogliano says:

    71.1 million cap / 23 players = 3.1 million / player average

    $1.85 million isn’t league minimum but it is also pretty far below the average salary for a NHL player. Not sure if Hendricks is a real NHL player or not but just wanted to climb in that 1.85 is a lot lower salary than many people are making out in a 71.1 million (and rising) cap environment.

  160. denny33 says:

    Caramel Obvious,
    Two separate transactions….

    Nobody on the planet objects to a 3rd round pick for Scrivens.

    The numerous citations from around the league are clear on the Hendricks deal.

  161. Derek says:

    gogliano:
    71.1 million cap / 23 players = 3.1 million / player average

    $1.85 million isn’t league minimum but it is also pretty far below the average salary for a NHL player.Not sure if Hendricks is a real NHL player or not but just wanted to climb in that 1.85 is a lot lower salary than many people are making out in a 71.1 million (and rising) cap environment.

    Team structure isn’t based around league averages for players. The Oilers top line going forward makes 6 millon each or roughly 25 percent of the Oilers total cap space tied up in three players. They also need two top pairing defenders if they ever plan on challenging for a playoff spot. The bottom 6 forwards and bottom 2 defenders are where you look for cheap cap hits, not overpays on 35 year old muckers with poor stats.

    Every dollar counts in a cap environment, whether the owner is rich or not.

  162. BONVIE says:

    Caramel Obvious,

    It’s not about improving this years team anymore, if you think that your asleep at the wheel. All improvements need to be made with keeping in mind the rosters for the next few years.

    I am less disgusted than last year when a non playoff team picked up a UFA Smithson and gave up a good draft pick, that they ended up using an even better draft pick to recoup those draft picks.

  163. G Money says:

    Pouzar: Your second quote references amateur scouts projecting how amateur goaltenders will perform in the NHL. That is not what I am talking about here. In this case I am talking about pro scouts evaluating present NHL goaltenders and their performance in the NHL in the absence of the requisite sample size to even begin considering Save %.

    Heh. Still can’t see it? OK, I’ll give it one last mae geri aimed at the feline, just for gits and shiggles.

    In your first post, you referenced one (actually two) articles that make it clear that: a. save % is probably the only valid statistical measure of goalies we have; b. save % varies so dramatically from game to game and season to season that you need an enormous amount of data to draw any sort of comparative conclusion about how good or bad a goalie is; c. so much so that even one full season is not nearly adequate for drawing conclusions, and d. even scouting is not much better, as given by the example of NHL amateur scouting.

    There is an adequate save % data set (5000+ shots, vs the sample minimum from the article of about 2300) for Dubnyk indicating that his save % of .910 puts him right in that vast mass of mid-range goalies. That’s all you can conclude about him right now.

    There is a tiny sample of data suggesting that he sucks, but you can draw no conclusions – absolutely none about his true talent level from that sample – which is the entire point of your article.

    It’s also clear from both your posts and your casual request for a scouting report on Scrivens that you are not an amateur goalie scout, let alone an NHL-level goalie scout.

    So there you have it – with no professional scouting to back you up and nothing but a tiny 27-game sample size that your own post and the article mocks as utterly inadequate – you see no contradiction in declaring yourself qualified to conclude that, in your words, “you know Doob-nick sucks” …

    Sure.

  164. sliderule says:

    The word on Dubnyk at the draft was that he gave away bad goals.

    The word on Dubnyk with the oilers is he still gives away bad goals.

    I would have preferred a draft pick but the oil were not going to get much for Dubnyk

    The good news is we don’t have to watch any more of those brutal commercials.

  165. FastOil says:

    Why, when you have cap room to absorb Scrivens, take on that Hendricks contract (other than a Woodstock flashback?).

    Season lost, deadline approaching. If you aren’t cagey enough to get something for DD let him walk or reveal him to waivers. That deal was a clear Oiler loss.

    Scrivens for a 3rd good.

    There can be no progress with this kind of management. As smart as MacT sounds somebody ( I don’t say it’s him ) is making 50/50 or worse decisions. To move forward that ratio won’t work.

    Thus, the status quo, no forward progress, bad team.

  166. Ryan says:

    TheOtherJohn:
    No difficulty with Scrivens deal. He is definitely worth a look. No clue how with that much $$ tied up in Rinne that Nashville is a serious competitor for Scrivens but….maybe

    Trading DD for a 4L player making $1.85m for 3 more years is asinine.Also@mirtle: Hendricks is the eighth worst possession forward in the NHL this season and appears to be trending downward http://t.co/BEped48txH

    Other than that, its all good

    Btw, don’t scroll down on your link to number 16.

  167. Ryan says:

    FastOil:
    Why, when you have cap room to absorb Scrivens, take on that Hendricks contract (other than a Woodstock flashback?).

    Season lost, deadline approaching. If you aren’t cagey enough to get something for DD let him walk or reveal him to waivers. That deal was a clear Oiler loss.

    Scrivens for a 3rd good.

    There can be no progress with this kind of management. As smart as MacT sounds somebody ( I don’t say it’s him ) is making 50/50 or worse decisions. To move forward that ratio won’t work.

    Thus, the status quo, no forward progress, bad team.

    It gets worse. Aren’t there rumors that the oilers offered Hendricks more cash than Nashville that he previously declined.

  168. Pouzar says:

    G Money,

    Whoa!

    Based on the tone of your response I have offended you some how.

    I wasn’t implying that I was any kind of a scout pro or amateur btw.

    Cheers.

  169. G Money says:

    Pouzar,

    No! Just pointing out that your post (and in that sense I agree with it) points out what I believe is a fairly well accepted concept – that ranking goalies is extraordinarily hard, even when you have a lot of data.

    By that same token – you cannot conclude that Dubnyk sucks. Can’t do it. Absolutely no data to support such a conclusion. Doing so is a contradiction.

    Or to put it another way – the only conclusion the data actually support is that Dubnyk is a mid-pack goalie having a bad year.

    Nothing more.

  170. G Money says:

    Ryan: It gets worse.Aren’t there rumors that the oilers offered Hendricks more cash than Nashville that he previously declined.

    I believe there is also a rumour that Scrivens, when told of the trade, demanded a raise and a retroactive NTC.

    If there isn’t such a rumour, I’m starting it, dammit!

  171. VanOil says:

    Does anyone have a link for the young prospects game?

    Despite subscribing to 4 Sportnet channels, Sportsnet does not feel West Coast fans are interested enough in hockey to play it here.

  172. Pouzar says:

    G Money: Pouzar, No! Just pointing out that your post (and in that sense I agree with it) points out what I believe is a fairly well accepted concept – that ranking goalies is extraordinarily hard, even when you have a lot of data. By that same token – you cannot conclude that Dubnyk sucks. Can’t do it. Absolutely no data to support such a conclusion. Doing so is a contradiction.Or to put it another way – the only conclusion the data actually support is that Dubnyk is a mid-pack goalie having a bad year.Nothing more.

    So you think there is enough data to use save% to evaluate DD? So you disagree with the article?
    Not challenging you here. Just trying to understand your position.

  173. FastOil says:

    Ryan: It gets worse.Aren’t there rumors that the oilers offered Hendricks more cash than Nashville that he previously declined.

    I have no idea about this but if it’s true, the pursuit of reputation which we have witnessed before, instead of the pursuit of who is currently playing well and projects to moving forward, still holds sway.

    When I think about it, it reminds me of decisions makers viewing players like high end cars. Collecting cool things, not thinking about what works now. It makes me think of privilege without accountability.

  174. G Money says:

    Pouzar,

    There are approximately 5000 saves worth of data showing DD to be a .910 goalie.

    That’s enough data to draw a valid conclusion – Dubie is almost certainly a mid-pack NHL goalie.

    If you want to conclude that “Doobie sucks”, the only data you have to support it is the 27 games this season. That’s nowhere near enough. Not remotely. Doing so is not only unsupported by the data, but in direct contradiction to the gist of the article which is that even an entire season is not enough data.

    Agree? Disagree?

  175. Pouzar says:

    G Money: Pouzar, There are approximately 5000 saves worth of data showing DD to be a .910 goalie.That’s enough data to draw a valid conclusion – Dubie is almost certainly a mid-pack NHL goalie.If you want to conclude that “Doobie sucks”, the only data you have to support it is the 27 games this season. That’s nowhere near enough. Not remotely. Doing so is not only unsupported by the data, but in direct contradiction to the gist of the article which is that even an entire season is not enough data.Agree? Disagree?

    So you disagree with the article? Please answer my question. Not trying to pin you down but the main premise of the article is that No…there isn’t enough data to conclude anything from Save % in DD’s case.

  176. G Money says:

    Pouzar: So you disagree with the article? Please answer my question. Not trying to pin you down but the main premise of the article is that No…there isn’t enough data to conclude anything from Save % in DD’s case.

    I agree with the article.

    If you think the article does not let you draw a conclusion about Dubnyk, then your interpretation of the article as far as I can tell is flat out wrong.

    I am not at all sure how you conclude that there isn’t enough data on DD to draw a conclusion. There is. Even the analysis that Awad himself does (the analysis that forms the backbone of this article) uses goaltenders with roughly comparable amounts of save data (three years, or about 180 games on average. Dubnyk is at 171, well within the range). The data is available from the Awad article, you can look at it yourself. There’s even a season of Dubynk in there.

    Maybe the gist of the article is not clear?

    The point of the article is not that there is some magic number of data points needed to suddenly draw a valid conclusion. Not at all. The point is that save percentage game to game is so wildly variant that you have to draw massive error bars around the data in order for your conclusions to be valid. Those error bars go down the more data you get, and by the time you get to threeish years of data, the error bars are narrow enough to draw some conclusions. But even with an entire careers worth of data, the error bars are still going to be massive.

    What the article is pointing out is that the conclusions you reach are highly sensitive to data volume, and are restricted in how definitive the nature of that conclusion is. That is the nature of statistics based on highly noisy data, and that is the point of the article.

    In this case,
    a. yes, there is enough data to draw a conclusion on Dubnyk
    b. that conclusion (with appropriately wide error bars) is that Dubnyk is almost certainly a league average goaltender. .910 with 5000 saves worth of data solidly puts you there.
    c. the one thing that you absolutely cannot conclude is that “Dubnyk sucks”, since the only data supporting that contention is 27 games long, which is wildly inadequate

    More clear?

  177. Ryan says:

    FastOil: I have no idea about this but if it’s true, the pursuit of reputation which we have witnessed before, instead of the pursuit of who is currently playing well and projects to moving forward, still holds sway.

    When I think about it, it reminds me of decisions makers viewing players like high end cars. Collecting cool things, not thinking about what works now. It makes me think of privilege without accountability.

    Iirc this rumor’s from mc79hockey’s twitter feed.

  178. Ryan says:

    Btw nice to see Traktor and Punjabioil here tonight–two dudes who predate myself at lowetide.

    Traktor’ s a relatively quiete dude now, but he used to provide a very knowledgeable yet dissenting opinion on things.

  179. stevezie says:

    BONVIE: It’s not about improving this years team anymore, if you think that your asleep at the wheel. All improvements need to be made with keeping in mind the rosters for the next few years.

    No. At some point this team needs to say, “Screw the difference between picking 3rd and 6th, we need to be respectable.” I think we passed that point a long time ago, and I think MacT agrees with me.

    It is meaningful to improve the team now. To change the losing culture, to placate the fans, to lure UFAs, to be a self-respecting franchise we must try to win now. Not at all costs, obviously, but in the case of this trade- Yes, I absolutely think Hendricks was acquired in part to improve the team this year. I’m on the fence about Hendricks as a player, but I fully support the philosophy.

    denny33: Two separate transactions….

    Come on sir, obviously they are related. I mean, come on.

    Derek: Every dollar counts in a cap environment, whether the owner is rich or not.

    This is technically true, but rich owners can create cap space. Search your feelings, you know this to be true.

    TheOtherJohn: Someone suggested that Nashville might have swooped in to trade for Scrivens. Big whoop!! not sure if Oilers trading for Scrivens was for this year but ……In any event with Rinne Nashville cannot affford to resign him as a UFA at $2-3m because of Rinne. So Scrivens hits the FA market if he goes to Nashville or not

    This is not the whole story. The “why didn’t we just wait for UFA!” trap assume we would have an equal shot at all players, which is obviously not true; it also assume we would be as comfortable offering Scrivens a contract without having him play for us, which is not true; finally, it assumes that we don’t care about the difference between Dubnyk and Scrivens for the rest of the season, which I clearly disagree.

  180. ohhell says:

    There seems to be a whole lot of angst on the chatter-board today. Not sure what the big deal is; perhaps the pented frustration of OIlernation surfacing. I think it is pointless to evaluate the two deals individually. Both deals should be evaluated as one collective.

    The way I see it, MacT did not have confidence in Dubnyk going forward so he just acquired the opportunity to sign Scrivens to a deal before UFA. In fact, he has an opportunity to evaluate him first and sign if interested. He also has the opportunity to trade him at the deadline if a signing is not possible. MacT thought the gamble was worth it.

    Regarding Dubnyk vs. Scrivens, the underlying numbers favour Scrivens going all the way back to their teen years. Scrivens has consitently posted the better numbers. Is he better? I have no idea. But MacT thinks it is worth a shot and I agree.

    Regarding the Dubnyk trade, MacT had to decide if he would throw Duby to the waiver wire or try and get something. Some feel that Hendricks has negative value and that we would have been better exposing Duby to the wire. I disagree. I think they are looking for players that can PK and have some grit. Hendricks may not be the answer and the cap may be too high and it may cause us cap regret in the future, but MacT felt $900k of oppurtunity cost was worth it. I am fine with that.

    Lastly, I expect that the Scivens deal came together quickly and that there may have been other suitors so MacT had a limited window to deal Dubnyk. I am pleased with the moves and hope that Scrivens pans out and can be signed. Worst case, he underperforms, doesn’t sign and can’t be moved at the deadline. That was the current situation with Dubnyk. Best case, he performs well and signs or becomes a deadline asset.

  181. Pouzar says:

    G Money,

    Thx G….I was waaay off on the “amount of data needed” front in DD’s case.
    Don’t ask :)

    While I am no scout, my Doobie sux conclusion was not based on any stats.
    I always thought that to my eye his save % was flattering. I was never a believer that he was “good enough” or even league average.

    Then again I thought the Bruins would never win shite with Tim Thomas as their SG.

    But given the randomness of save%, and I know it’s the best we have, doesn’t it really suck in ranking goaltenders?

    Thx G

  182. G Money says:

    Pouzar,

    Heh, no problem. Sorry my first few posts came out sounding combative, that must just be my “professorial” tone of voice gone bad for Ekblad.

    And yeah, agree – save% is truly a bad measure for goalies, but it’s the best one we’ve got. Kinda like democracy – a terrible way to govern unless you compare it to all the rest.

    As for seeing Doobie bad – just remember, the reason save % (as bad as it is) is probably the best measure we’ve got is that us crazy humans suffer terribly from recency bias. Take an average goalie (which by all accounts is Nashville’s Dubnyk) and put him through a lousy season and suddenly we all knew he always sucked.

    Same thing works in reverse … one mediocre goalie has a great season and he’s the next coming of Hasek and can sucker some poor GM into giving him a giant contract. Maybe he’ll truly be good, but history suggests that a nasty regression to mediocre is in order. Dellow’s got a nice little article on that effect (http://www.mc79hockey.com/?p=6252), which also points out how unintuitive the concept of “randomness” really is.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca